As you can see, the Daily Mail is NOT OK with sussex.com, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s new website, in which they’re trying to organize everything in one website framework. When the website went live, the Mail immediately got sources to cry about the whole thing was terribly “gauche” and how the royals should do something about it. The Windsors can’t do sh-t unless they’re prepared to go to Parliament just to remove Harry and Meghan’s Sussex titles. Which I wouldn’t rule out, even if the Windsors would look like idiots for not removing Prince Andrew’s York titles. Anyway, Sarah Vine barfed out yet another screed about how the Sussex titles should be removed, and I’m not going to excerpt any of it. Meanwhile, the Mail got Becky English to coauthor this completely bonkers piece about the website which brought down the monarchy.
Prince Harry and Meghan’s new website using their Sussex titles is a betrayal of their agreement with the late Queen Elizabeth, it was claimed last night. The couple’s ‘provocative’ decision to relaunch their homepage as ‘Sussex.com’ sparked accusations they are trying to be ‘more Royal’.
Well-placed sources said the new online venture would provide a ‘big challenge’ for Buckingham Palace’s Lord Chamberlain. The top Royal official must decide whether to take the Sussexes to task or ‘let it slide’ in order to keep the already fragile family peace. The growing row centres around the Duke and Duchess’s decision to replace their Archewell website – the umbrella name for all their philanthropic and business endeavours – with ‘Sussex.com’.
Many close to the royal household believe it is a flagrant breach of the supposedly cast-iron assurances Harry and Meghan gave the late Queen when they acrimoniously quit as working royals in 2020, and comes perilously close to using their royal status for commercial gain. Others described it as a betrayal of the agreement, ‘if not in letter, certainly in spirit’.
But a source close to the couple brushed off the claims and defended the use of their royal titles for the website. They said: ‘Prince Harry and Meghan are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex. That is a fact. It is their surname and family name.’
The palace has declined to comment, preferring to focus on The King who returned to London yesterday for meetings and cancer treatment.
But one insider said: ‘Buckingham Palace may have its hands tied in taking action. The King has other things he needs to focus on at the moment and the last thing His Majesty needs is another fight with his son. But this won’t go down well at all.’
Following the so-called ‘Sandringham summit’ in 2020, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex agreed to step back from royal duties and not use their HRH titles for business purposes or trade off their royal connections. They were also forced to put on ice their existing website, Sussexroyal.com, which had been launched weeks earlier without any warning and effectively contained their ‘manifesto’ for a new life half-in, half-out of the royal family. Since then they have traded under their new guise of Archewell. The couple’s decision to launch Sussex.com this week was therefore seen as reopening old wounds.
Insiders highlighted the decision to use only Meghan’s royal coat of arms on the web page and not Harry’s. Some theorised that having the prince’s coat of arms would be too provocative ‘even for them’. Others wondered whether it was because ‘ultimately this is a re-branding for Meghan’.
Harry’s coat of arms would have been TOO PROVOCATIVE! The Welsh Guards would have to ride at dawn to defeat the provocative coat of arms! Anyway, the Mail can’t stick to one rationale for why this is a slap in the face to a dead queen – Harry agreed to not use his HRH and he isn’t. He agreed to stop using the “Sussex Royal” branding for social media and the one website. The issue, we were told, was the word “royal.” The Windsors believe that they alone own the word “royal.” The Sussexes are not using the word “royal.” They also ignored that family in their personal bios on sussex.com. So what’s the issue? Also: I would be very interested in hearing if Harry actually had to sign anything in 2020 and, if so, what exactly he signed. Because reading between the lines of this ridiculous outrage, the Windsors don’t actually have anything other than “but Harry promised, this was the vague verbal agreement!” We know Meghan didn’t sign anything… because they excluded her from all of the exit talks.
Note by CB: Get the Top 8 stories about Harry and Meghan at the One Love premiere when you sign up for our mailing list! I only send one email a day on weekdays around lunchtime.
Photos courtesy of Backgrid, cover courtesy of the Mail.
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Prince Harry and Meghan, Duke and Duchess of Sussex attend the Endeavour Fund Awards 2020 at the Mansion House in London. Pictured: Meghan Markle, Prince Harry BACKGRID USA 5 MARCH 2020 USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- ** RIGHTS: NO WEB ** London, UNITED KINGDOM – Meghan, Duchess of Sussex accompanied by Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex attends The Endeavour Fund Awards at Mansion House in London, England. Pictured: Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex BACKGRID USA 5 MARCH 2020 BYLINE MUST READ: JOHN RAINFORD / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – The Duke and Duchess of Sussex – Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend The Endeavour Fund Awards at Mansion House in London. Pictured: Prince Harry – Duke of Sussex – Meghan Markle Duchess of Sussex BACKGRID USA 5 MARCH 2020 BYLINE MUST READ: JOHN RAINFORD / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Prince Harry and Meghan Markle pictured while leaving The Royal Albert Hall after their final Royal Duties at the Mountbatten Festival of Music. Pictured: Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex, Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex BACKGRID USA 7 MARCH 2020 BYLINE MUST READ: Timmie / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Duke and Duchess of Sussex attend the Mountbatten Festival of Music at the Royal Albert Hall. Pictured: Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex – Meghan, Duchess of Sussex BACKGRID USA 7 MARCH 2020 USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Members of the royal family and politicians are pictured arriving at Westminster Abbey for the Commonwealth Day Service. Pictured: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle BACKGRID USA 9 MARCH 2020 BYLINE MUST READ: Stephen Crawshaw / BACKGRID USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- London, UNITED KINGDOM – Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend the annual Commonwealth Day Service at Westminster Abbey. Pictured: Prince Harry, Meghan Markle BACKGRID USA 9 MARCH 2020 USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
-
- Montecito, CA – Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, Duke and Duchess of Sussex celebrate the 3-year anniversary of their marriage that took place on 19 May 2018 at Windsor Castle in London. Now they moved to the USA with their son Archie Mountbatten, where they are also expecting their second child, which makes Archie a big brother. Pictured: Prince Harry, Meghan Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle BACKGRID USA 19 MAY 2021 USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*
The real crisis is the lazy heir William who refuses to work. This is another deflection coming up with another petty attack on the sussexes. If they let Andrew keep his title. And remove the sussexes Charles will look like a fool. The ex Mrs Andrew uses her duchess title for commercial purposes and has done so for years. Harry and Meghan agreed to the terms.
Mrs Andrew🤣
Pray tell, Sarah Vine, what will it take for all the endless gaslighting and vile rota nonsense against the Sussexes to finally S-T-O-P?!!! 🤯 🤥 🤡💩 🤐 🙏🏽
Well, if they want to get technical, Buckingham Palace broke the Sandringham agreement first. Harry was promised security and severance pay which the RF reneged on. But of course, that’s okay. The Sussexes have not used the word royal or their HRHs. They were not told they couldn’t use their name. As usual, the BM is making much ado about nothing. They are just mad that Sussex.com is slick, professional, and doesn’t need the RF for clout.
KC not only breached the terms of the Sandringham Summit Agreement, he also broke the lease agreement regarding Frogmore Cottage. While any reasonable person knows Harry never agreed that he and Meghan would relinquish the right to use their name, Sussex, he and Meghan should not be expected to honor an agreement that the other party has abandoned. Ridiculous. But that’s why we call the royalists who would have that unhinged expectation “Derangers”.
Needless to say, whatever assurances, verbal agreements etc, the Sussexes made were between them and the late QEII. Once the queen passed on, nothing is valid anymore; the queen’s death de-fanged the entire Windsor clan. But leave it to the right wing racist tabloids to remind the Windsors that they can do absolutely nothing to the Sussexes, that they have absolutely no control over the Sussexes. The Lord Chamberlain has his hands tied? No, his hands are free, it’s just that Chamberlain has absolutely zero authority over anything Sussex.
Re security – that was an empty promise. The BRF can’t promise security. That is the jurisdiction of the Met and the Home Office, with some input from the BRF, if I recall correctly. That input would be limited to who are working royals, as determined by the monarch.
Re ‘severance pay’. The royals don’t get “paid” the way we understand it. However, I do recall that Charles may have been funding them for a while from his Duchy income until they got settled.
I do think Harry could have royal protection on UK home soil. That he doesn’t IMO is petty.
To refresh your memory @Esquire, Charles abruptly cut off any and all ‘promised’ funding for the Sussexes in the first quarter of 2020, as Harry publicly revealed in 2021, during the Oprah interview. The removal of funding, along with the abrupt removal of security protection in March 2020, while the Sussexes were sitting ducks on Vancouver Island, was orchestrated by Charles’ people in concert with the MET police and the conservative Tory government. These machinations were designed to leave the Sussexes defenseless and economically unstable. The firm’s goal was to force Harry to come crawling back with or without Meghan and Archie. 😳
To make matters even worse, Chuck later pretended in face-saving fashion, that he had helped H&M with the down payment on their Montecito home. Chuck had absolutely nothing to do with H&M’s purchase of their first real home!
Chuck, the firm, and the Tory government, completely miscalculated the courage, grit and determination of H&M, coupled with their high-powered connections. The cruel, toxic firm had no concept either of the unexpected generosity, compassion, and extensive resources of Sussex fairy godfather, Mr. Tyler Perry.
From what little I know about these people in England, didn’t Charles also violate his agreement with his mummy by installing his (oh, what shall I call her) his Camilla as “queen” now, instead of queen consort? So, what the hell are the BM talking about?
lol. Cry more. I saw all these old women with titles writing books with their HRH titles on the book cover. Charles is selling hats, scarfs. H&M are working and the titles are their right according to their silly rules. If they don’t want H&M to have it, they should abolish the monarchy.
I don’t think harry signed anything. The mail is having a heart attack over nothing as per. That’s all. Harry and Meghan agreed not to use their HRH and, like you pointed out, they haven’t.Everything else they are entitled to use as they please. The DM needs to come to terms with that
Sussex is their legal name. So hypocritical. Mike and peter use their royal connections and not a word of media criticism
Let’s imagine he did sign something at Sandringham Summit for a moment… and in the less than :30 he spent w KC they agreed to some new deal because KC is in a tight spot w William because of whatever is going on over there and Chuck is finally is figuring out he looks like a horrendous dog$hit father. Harry moves forward with what and how he wants to live his life. Tinfoil theory possibly but… where’s Kate?
You should read the comments. You’d think Harry and Meghan committed regicide. Some loony woman on Twitter said “Something must be done!” I was like, something like what? Lock them in the Tower? They can’t believe Harry and Meghan are beyond the royals’s control.
Psst! …. Hey, William, your incandescence is showing.
Do they really want them to use Windsor instead? Because that’s the alternative. And Windsor is associated with the rest of that family. Sussex isn’t.
100% BRF/RR please propose a logical alternative…… we’re waiting……..
If anyone is in breach of the Sandringham Agreement – if such a thing even exists – it’s Charles, taking away Frogmore, security and being an awful dad who’s briefing against the Sussexes, not telling the British media to stop attacking a two year old.
The thing about Sussex: it’s their name, the coat of arms is theirs – both gifted bt QEII.
And the way they all go on about the HRH: everyone knows Harry is the son of the current monarch, as well as A&L are his grandkids.
Don’t they have any problems at all in the UK that the press could look into? Crumbling infrastructure, destitute NHS, hungry kids, empty shelves, Brexit…
Yeah…..I’m going to just say it’s a hard pass on Invictus 2027 being held anywhere in the U.K. Consider this Exhibit A.
^^ It most definitely is or should certainly be a ‘hard pass’ for Invictus to be held in Great Britain ever again!
Number One: It simply appears that certain entities would like it to be held in the U.K. because of the promising influx of money and p.r. prestige that hosting would bring. That alone is not a motivation consistent with the chief ideals and mission of the Invictus Games.
Number Two: Of course, it is sad for the genuine, deserving-of-respect, veteran military aspirants in the U.K., who might benefit from the IG being held in their home country. Sadly, they need look no further than the tepid and nearly nonexistent support they have received from the royal firm and the Tory government regarding their participation at recent Invictus Games held in Düsseldorf (2022), and in The Hague (2023).
Number Three: South Korea and Washington, D.C. have put in bids for IG 2027. Either destination is 1,000 times more preferable than having IG held at any venue in the U.K. anytime soon! 🤦♀️ The U.K. should be happy that the first Invictus Games (2014) was launched in London, and give this recent desperate clamoring for a piece of the IG pie, a rest! 🙄
On top of everything Kaiser pointed out (they’re not saying royal, they’re not acknowledging the family, and they’re not using HRH), there is certainly a precedent for undoing what the Queen has set in place. Otherwise they’d still have Frogmore. This site is no impulse update. They know what they’re doing now and have a better lay of the land. The BM stays mad regardless, but facts are facts. They are the Sussexes. And they would be successful either way, they’re sparing y’all the embarrassment of doing it WITHOUT the name.
I think the fact that they aren’t acknowledging the royals at all is exactly the reason for the hissy fit…how dare they not need us!!!! Hahahaaah staying g Sussexes
may I add some legitimate, I feel, criticism? Besides the unhinged BM screeching points… why DID they go with sussex.com? Couldn’t they have come up with harry & meghan in focus for their domain? without the duke/duchess in front, Sussex is just a UK county and makes it sound like a governmental website
@vanna, it is their title. All BM and racist island want is to erase them from royal family / bloodline. They are the Sussexes, it was a gift from Harry’s grandmother. Why wouldn’t they use it? They said they wouldn’t use “royal” and they didn’t.
But don’t they want to remove themselves from this narrative? The royal family is a mess, so why emphasize that connection? I’m interested in Meghan as an individual (and Harry too) more than as a duchess/duke.
@Mrs Robinson, did Harry or Meghan say any time they were republican and want to abolish the ruling system in UK? Royal titles are not about Will, Charles or Kate and their racist hatred. It is Harry and his family’s birth right to have these titles, besides it was a gift from his grandmother. Why would they want to remove it just because the racists want them to? Like I said, that was all they wanted while abusing H&M, them being out of the royal bloodline even though they committed no crimes. Speaking against abuse isn’t a crime even though tabloids want us to believe that. If they want to remove it, they should abolish the monarchy. H&M are using the gift given to them by QEII after their marriage. Charles can’t take that away like he did with Frogmore.
I said it yesterday but Sussex itself may in fact be their surname. So it’s the same as someone using their surname as their website name.
@Mrs Robinson, this is NOT about H&M ’emphasizing’ what happens to be their family name, as bestowed upon them by QE-II when they married, in 2018.
Using one’s own name and/ or a gifted ancient title, is a normal thing to do. What the firm and BM/ rota are doing is decidedly wacko, vile, irresponsible, harmful, baseless, petty, cruel, and vastly unproductive.
There is no way Harry and Meghan can “remove themselves from this narrative”. We are four years on from them leaving England, and there are multiple “articles” every single day, in the British media.
They could rename themselves Bert and Ernie, and Salty Isle would vomit all over themselves that they think they are interesting enough to call themselves Bert and Ernie.
That would be more like sussex.gov.uk.
Robert Johnson was interviewed last night l was goin to turn him off but then l saw de Sussex and Johnson negative comments so l watched it, talk about a turn around on Megan and Harry, he was their biggest supporter, who knew !!!! He spoke about the terrible Wales Jamica trip saying if the Sussex where there it would of been successful snd would of shown the UK in a positive good light, spoke about their merits ,awards, Invictous games and said wait for it Megan was a superstar and will always be successful in whatever she does, he was on a role !!!! Also Sussex is their name and they have every right to use it, If you have 5 mins def check it out
At this point though, the whole world knows them as the Sussexes. The duke and duchess of sussex. And it’s clear and short and easy. Sussex.com is an easy type compared to HarryandMeghan.com. I know that sounds silly but I’d imagine there’s a marketing strategy behind keeping it short and simple and to the point. And they’re known as sussex so why not?
they could have chosen sussexes.com then I guess. I’m not arguing that their names combined would be a snappy and ideal choice, and I see their issue with H&M.. but to me sussex.com is not a good choice, since they mainly operate outside the UK and have no tangible connection to Sussex, besides their bestoved titles (which they should obvisously keep).
Hmm, sussex.com versus sussexes.com? I still think sussex.com is just a simpler type and visual for a website. Better than Sussexes.com or harryandmeghan.com
I’m not sure the tangible connection to the place matters when they are well-known as the duke and duchess of sussex.
harryandmeghan.com sounds like a wedding website 😂
Sussex.com is a good umbrella under which everything else resides.
LOL @Vanna, fyi, there are four cities in the U.S. named ‘Sussex’ (in New Jersey, Virginia, Wisconsin, and Wyoming), in addition to four counties named ‘Sussex’ (in Delaware, New Jersey, Virginia, and New York). As well, there are Sussex place names that exist in Australia too. Forget about the number of streets and businesses in the U.S. with ‘Sussex’ as part of their name! 😱 Thus, England does not have a monopoly, despite the ‘Sussex’ name’s English origins.
Moreover, census records document that the Sussex surname or family name “was found in the USA, Canada, Scotland, and the U.K. between 1871 and 1920. The most Sussex families were found in the U.K. in 1891. In 1880, there were 11 Sussex families living in Illinois.” Obviously, this is just a small sampling. Thus, once again, neither the U.K., nor the British monarchy hold exclusive rights to the name, ‘Sussex.’
Furthermore, historically, the name ‘Sussex,’ is derived from Old English ‘Suth-Seaxe,’ which means “land or people of South Saxons.” This group of ancient people originated from Germanic tribes who settled in England during the 5th and 6th centuries. Hmm, the English connection to Germany comes full circle, eh! 😂 Even the name, ‘Markle,’ has Dutch and Germanic roots. 🤔
Give it up, though, cuz Harry & Meghan, and their children, are the most famous and well-known Sussexes in the world! 🌎🫡 Boom! 🫳
LOL @aftershocks. Perfect and thank you for the history. I live/grew up within an hour of Sussex, WI. Have never heard anyone in my many years ever associate Sussex with the royal family/England. Ever. There are a couple of golf courses in Sussex, WI we’ve played at, before & after H&M became the Duke & Duchess of Sussex. Entertain myself thinking about H&M being the Duke & Duchess of the golf courses.
My personal opinion would be for their site called success.com or successes.com. Both are taken already. Too bad. The BM meltdown would be epic.
My petty self wants H&M to make pop up visits in the US cities named Sussex. A food truck too that includes freshly squeezed lemonade, lemon olive oil cake, green chile & avocado dip, coconut chicken curry and salad shirazi. Along with the Together cookbook to purchase to benefit the Grenfell community.
Yeah @AGreatReckoning! What a cool notion for H&M to visit all the Sussex towns and counties in the U.S. 🫡 Especially, since there appears to be about eight combined total. The only thing is, people and businesses that have the Sussex name might expect equal time. 😉😂
The idea you have re H&M visiting in a food truck with Meghan-centric recipes and copies of the Together Cookbook, is spot-on! You should try and suggest it to them! 🤌🏼 ✨️
It’s so cool, too, that you happen to live in one of the Sussex towns I named! What a coincidence! 👌🏽👍🏽
Thanks @aftershocks. Minor correction, I don’t live in Sussex,WI, just within an hour of it. A lovely place though. Just had a wee cackle at Sussex being considered only royal when I grew up just thinking it was a city over x amount of miles away.
I would love my manifestation of Meghan-centric/Grenfell women recipes food truck to become a reality. They could park in our lot! I’d buy almost everyday. Would also need them to include a soup course.
Everyone is thinking way too deeply into this. Many professionals have independent websites set up for themselves (the vast majority using their name as the url). Instead of setting up two separate websites for Harry and Meghan individually, they need a joint site because their work intersects, and instead of going with a long and clunky harryandmeghan.com, they chose to use their last name.
They can’t go with H&M, there’s a pear company called HARRY&DAVID, they certainly won’t use Markle, so what else are they supposed to do? If they came out with a new hybrid surname like Spencer-Ragland exactly zero people would ever use it, they’d just revert to Harry and Meghan and then nobody would remember the damn url.
Can’t wait until tomorrow’s Daily Fail headline: FURY AT THE PALACE AS IT’S REVEALED MEGHAN USES SUSSEX SURNAME IN HER OWN MAIL ADDRESS IN DEVASTATING BLOW TO DEAD QUEEN
Their last name is not Sussex, though it is the name of the Dukedom QEII conferred on them as a gift. Harry’s surname is actually Mountbatten-Windsor, which the children used prior to their parents taking the royal titles.
The Dukedom will not be removed. It’s all hot air. On the other hand, I can see William taking matters into his own hands when he becomes King.
Esquire, I don’t believe that Prince Harry’s birth certificate gave him a last name, does it? Isn’t he Prince Henry–several names?
S&S: correct. I’m quite lazy and loose with my language today, waiting for laundry. You are correct, that’s not his birth name. M-W is not a real name, but a constructed one for convenience if royals need a name where no other title is conferred. Philip demanded Mountbatten, Windsor was a construct to gloss over their German origins. As I said elsewhere, the distant family members go by “Windsor” (no Mountbatten).
@Esquire, just as Harry used ‘Wales,’ as his surname in school and in the military, he and his family can now use ‘Sussex,’ or in some instances, ‘Mountbatten-Windsor.’ In fact, Archie was given the surname, ‘Mountbatten-Windsor,’ upon his birth (well after QE-II had bestowed the Sussex dukedom upon Harry). H&M declined to use Archie’s courtesy title, Earl of Dumbarton. I believe Harry was, to a certain degree, honoring his grandpa, Philip, in having Archie christened by the default ‘M-W’ male-line descendant surname.
For all we know, Archie & Lili, may still currently use ‘Mountbatten-Windsor’ in school, and will be referenced as Prince Archie Harrison of Sussex, and Princess Lilibet Diana of Sussex, only on formal occasions.
One of them over there said they could not wait until they are only Mr. & Mrs. Sussex, so…that is their name…
It is so outrageous (funny, sad, repulsive…fill in a word) that everyone else (all the MEGANs [with their various spellings] Candice, British journalists, US journalists, all the journalists around the world, youtubers, and everyone else) is allowed to make money off of H & M EXCEPT H & M.
vanna and Mrs Robinson, I think you need to remember that Harry doesn’t have a last name except for Sussex. When Wont and KHate became the P&PoW, their last name (and their kids) became Wales. Before that, it was Cambridge. Harry & Meghan’s last name is Sussex. It’s pretty simple. Why wouldn’t they use their last name.
I get so tired of hearing people wanting the titles taken away. My understanding is if there is treason involved then the titles would be stripped. Since the Duke of Windsor’s title was never stripped away by the UK Parliament and he was a Nazi collaborator (there’s plenty of evidence to prove that), I have to ask what grounds they would use to strip Harry’s titles. Do they REALLY want to go down that road?
AND there’s always the Andrew York Question. He’d be a convicted, not just presumed, rapist and pedophile if he’d had the guts to stand trial in the USA instead of taking 13 million of his poor old dying mother’s hard-earned pension money to settle. He’s still styled HRH. The only “crime” the Sussexes committed was to leave the clutches of their malefactors.
Anything that looks like H&M are making progress and thriving without the RF is a Problem and whining about this is better than writing about the Leftovers.
This! All the folks who keep saying, Harry and Meghan should have done this or that instead, just don’t get it. I said from day one of the Sussexes departure, that the noise will get louder the more successful they are away from the Firm. And William and Kates seeming emasculation makes it that much worst, especially given the embargo on the press telling the truth about that couple’s absence. But perhaps most important, the Sussexes are on top of the world and there simply no comparison among the leftovers.
I don’t think Harry signed anything. This promise to the Queen well that Queen is dead and I doubt he made any promises to her. They are deflecting heavily from whatever is going on behind the scenes with the lazy couple.
Precisely. It was a promise to the Queen and she’s dead. Also, Sussex is their last name. If Parliament stripped the Sussex title/name from them, then would Harry not go back to being a Windsor? Then it would be Windsor.com. ROFL! Or Windsor-Mountbatten.com. Oh I kind of love this!
I don’t think they actually have a last name? People act like this is an air they are putting on but Prince Harry’s legal name is Prince Harry and Meghan’s is Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex or the Duchess of Sussex?
Sarah Vine claimed that the Mountbatten-Windsor originally put on Archie’s birth certificate made that their name (although, like you, I hardly think the moaners would think that had less of a relationship with the British Royal Family, it’s an entirely made up name created for use by Prince Phillip’s non Royal male descendants… His real house name was Sonderberg-Glucksberg-Schleiswig-Holstein…. And Windsor is a name, taken from a place the family is associated with and used in place of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha as it doesn’t sound German) but that is not true. It was Archie’s name, but it has never been the name of either of his parents.
As has been pointed here Prince Harry is Royal because he is a male descendant of the King and as someone commented yesterday the name Sussex is Royal because of its association with him, not the other way round! The point is, and it has always been, that the Royalty comes through inheritance or marriage, the names and titles don’t make someone Royal that’s why Windsor, which used to be the name of an obscure aristocratic family, is now Royal. Because the Saxe-Coburgs took it and associated it with themselves?
They don’t have a surname but they do have labels and Sussex is one of those labels, IMO. In Shakespeare, I recall, Dukes of X and Y are frequently referred to as just X or Y.
Perhaps before yelling and crying and getting petitions started up the Mail should consider why Harry and Meghan make up 50% of their ‘Royals’ banner (other 50% being not the King and Queen , but William and Kate)? Why don’t they start with that first?
Changes were made to Archie’s birth certificate without their consent. Using the name M-W may have never been their choice for Archie either, it might have been the palace’s choice.
The surname for members of the BRF descended from QEII and PP is Mountbatten-Windsor when there is no title conferred. Philip demanded that Mountbatten come first. The distant relatives seem to use just Windsor, as in Lord Frederick Windsor, Lady Helen Windsor (prior to marriage) etc.
Why would Frederick and Helen use Mountbatten? They are cousins and not descendents of QE and Phil. The descendents can use M-W if they choose, but royal titles take precedence. That is why Harry and Will used Wales at school, Bea and Eugenie used York and why W&K use Wales now. Meghan, as an American, can use her maiden name if she wishes or use her title name.
@equality: precisely. That’s why I stated that the distant relatives only use Windsor. They don’t have a titled conferred. I was making the point that MW is supposedly the family’s surname, which is used when there is no hereditary peerage or other title conferred, such as a Dukedom. It’s strange though that, as an American, Meghan would use a royal title. You know, the War of Independence in 1776 which led to the American Constitution and all that …
Actually @Esquire, you previously stated, “The distant relatives seem to use just Windsor…” It does not make sense for you to phrase it this way if you already understood that the distant Windsor royal cousins who have no immediate family descent connection to Philip would thereby have no reason to use the hyphenated ‘Mountbatten’ preceding ‘Windsor.’
Furthermore, there is actually nothing ‘strange’ about Meghan using any of her married names and titles, all of which she has a distinct and legal right to use, no matter where she predominantly resides! 🙄
^^ Also, regardless of the fact that Meghan is an American citizen, and despite the 1776 American revolution of independence, Meghan still has a right to marry a British royal, and to use any and all names and titles conferred upon her through her marriage to a blood royal British prince! ✨️🇺🇲 👑 🇬🇧
It’s also “strange” that @Esquire keeps harping on Meghan’s use of her married name (which she is allowed to use) but this Esquire totally ignores the fact that the British media keeps harassing Meghan and meddling in this American’s business after the American Revolution. Somehow, that fact always escapes people like that. We see you.
Mountbatten Windsor was supposed to be used only by Philips descendants who are not Royal. Any who are royal are supposed to use just Windsor. So Harry should be just Windsor.
However many of them have broken that rule over the years. Princess Anne put Mountbatten Windsor on her marriage certificate and others have used it, can’t remember who.
No @Cairidh, the use of ‘Mountbatten-Windsor’ applies to all male-line descendants of Elizabeth and Philip. However, those descendants who have royal styles and titles do not typically use a surname. But when one is required, they can use ‘Mountbatten-Windsor,’ such as upon marriage. You can find a detailed discussion on Wiki regarding the use of Mountbatten-Windsor as a surname.
You are inaccurate in saying, “only those who are royal, use Windsor.” That is simply not true. The non-use of M-W pertains to those who have royal styles and titles. But there are occasions where such royals may use M-W, as Princess Anne did on her marriage certificate. Members of the royal family who do not hold royal styles and titles are still part of the royal family. For e.g., James and Louse are entitled to use HRH Prince/ Princess. However, since they have never used those titles since birth, they apparently will continue using noble titles, i.e. Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor, and James Mountbatten-Windsor, Earl of Wessex. I’ve seen Louise referenced as Lady Louise Windsor, but that is either an error, or else, a casual abbreviation, as M-W is Louise’s proper surname.
The declaration for this hyphenated surname to come into effect, was passed in 1960, by U.K.’s Privy Council. People magazine reporters must have read this CB thread yesterday, because an article came out today on this topic from People, which has been covered here today by @Kaiser in a separate thread.
I don’t even believe there was that “promise” to the Queen. Harry stated in SPARE that they offered to relinquish the Duke & Duchess of Sussex titles. It’s how he knew someone shared that confidential information to Wootton. Someone did not want them to relinquish their titles. I’m speculating it was QE2. No basis for my speculation other than Harry’s comments about QE2 being his Commander-in-Chief?. They had their secrets. My other speculation is that QE2 did not think well of Will & Kate.
Uhmmmm to whoever. If Meghan wanted to trade on a royal title (/s), isn’t she technically, Princess Henry? I’m feeling more snarky. Prince Harry and Princess Henry launch their new website. BM loses it, again, as per usual. Same day, same nonsense, the BM ARE the Groundhog’s Day movie. Except they will never get it right.
Ha! The DM is actually relieved to have something to write about besides Peg’s “commitment to duty.” They have been salivating for something like this and are so happy that they can eat off this for at least a week’s worth of outraged articles and TV appearances.
This absolutely came gift-wrapped for the KP comms department. “Where is Kate?” and “What does William do?” have disappeared from the news to make room for some pathetic outrage here.
Names and their use thereof seem to be a huge fricking deal in this family and with the BM. The possessiveness over Lilibet Diana? HRH titles? Who does (for instance, OfMichael) get to benefit financially from royalty and who “should” not.
@Roo, Exactly…H & M are CONTENT, and they have to generate content…the HATE works best for them.
What a fuss about nothing. They aren’t using HRH and they aren’t using the word royal. Meghan’s bio basically excluded her time in the UK LOL. Meanwhile the non-working royals in the UK are constantly using the RF for connections and money. This is panic plain and simple. The Sussexes are OUTSIDE again and going from strength to strength. The Windsors can’t compete on the best of days and now their ‘stars’ are out of commission for at least another month or so. The response to this story and the podcasting story is unhinged. And now we have 3 days of H&M in Canada. Oh man this is fun.
Maybe the website WILL bring down the monarchy- but if it does it’ll only be because people realize how useless the remaining Windsors are in comparison.
The British press are even more unhinged than usual. Charles and Kate (and William) being out of commission has really bothered them. It’s JUST a
Website update. They had no issues with Fergie selling Weight Watchers with her title. Charles has sold numerous things with his title as Prince of Wales. Harry and Meghan aren’t even selling anything, it’s just an updated website.
It’s even more idiotic considering the fact that Harry and Meghan are going to be seen at numerous events for Invictus for the next few days. You know, that whole showing up and doing good thing. They just look like fools, all of them.
To me the issue is more about the Sussexes listing their accomplishment before doing and after marriage. By doing this, this destroys the narrative the gutter UK media has been parroting of the Sussexes have done nothing since leaving that family. In addition, the global community, those that are interested will be able to easily check on what they are doing or have done. And for this, the gutter media wants the Sussexes punished. I think this was a powerful strategic move and am looking forward to seeing the great works this couple does continued.
Exactly. The BM like to pretend that they’re unemployed just coasting on media deals, but you can’t erase those accomplishments. And they’re not hiding from them. Angie L ( I won’t say her full name) called their bios pompous or something. Your bio is supposed to make you look good and these are adults in their late 30s and early 40s. They better have something to show!
It was a spiritual betrayal. I’m sorry that’s funny. Kind of the way Brad Pitt swears Angelina Jolie once promised him she’d never sell miraval. So what, Harry said he’d never use the word sussex? That’s bs. The whole world knows them as the Sussexes. If they stripped them of their titles, wouldn’t everyone just keep calling them the Sussexes? The lord chamberlain can’t do anything.
Would this be the same “Lord Chamberlain” who threatened Prince Harry with “consequences” if he didn’t drop his lawsuit naming William’s close personal friend Christian Jones, and then facilitated the removal of the Sussexes’ security and withdrawal of funds to them while they were exposed in Canada? Yeah, he can go kick rocks and swallow broken glass.
Oh yeah, you may be right. They already took their security and funds away years ago so yeah his hands really are tied in regards to doling out further consequences 🙄
Yesterday they were upset that they didn’t talk about their royal life online.
This is just more smokescreen. Where the hell’s Kate?
Disgusting people, the lot of ‘em.
These BM Rats are truly exhausting. Sussex is their name upon marriage and that is why Meghan Markle is “ Meghan The Duchess of Sussex”. The BM Rats and their Ilks can go f… themselves. Ps the FBI is still looking for the Duke of York have you seen him? Go kick rocks losers!
Man, I kind of wish they had just updated SussexRoyal and used that site going forward, and listed their children as HRH Prince and Princess. But as I have said many times before, they are not as petty as I am.
They have titles just like the duke of westminster has a title, or the earl of Peregrine, or the Marquess of Whoville – they can use those titles as they wish. They aren’t breaking any agreement, they never said they would stop using their titles.
But, at this point, the queen has passed away, so if they wanted to use Royal, who can stop them? Is Charles going to sue his son over it?
Becks1, I’ll join you in that thought! But they linked to sussexroyal on the new site quite prominently, I thought, and the old site links to sussex.com, so they are very clearly highlighting the “before and after” for new audiences. And BP and KP and the rabid British media with their revisionist fetish can’t do a damn thing about this except foam at the mouth. I freaking LOVE it!
My favorite title, which sounds fanciful (a bit silly, actually) but is in fact real, is Baron Young of Old Windsor. That would be the reprehensible Edward Young, who was awarded the title after retiring last year. It was a reward for his service to the RF, which probably included drafting the stipulation that the Sussexes not use their HRH or the sussexroyal name for their site.
Becky English is milking this website story for all she can because she knows people are going to start circling back to why William is not stepping up while his father is getting cancer treatment and Kate is MIA for mysterious reasons.
Preach Becks1!! That “agreement” stated they wouldn’t use their HRH or the word royal because there was no half in/half out. They would continue to receive security and funding during their transitional year. THAT AGREEMENT WAS NOT HONORED. Security and funding were stripped in under 3 months which voided the terms of the agreement. If they had my temper that website update would have included the HRH on them and their kids. I actually like sussex.com more than sussexroyal.com so they could keep the word royal.
But as usual the Sussexes are the only honorable people in the pack of jackals the brits call a royal family so they stick to the agreement. The press are just pissed because they continue to win while suing them into oblivion and I think they are taking it out on both the left behinds and the Sussexes. Why else would they be fake outraged about the “agreement” when they know it will just invite comment about how Charles didn’t honor it?
I grant you that far too much is being made of far too little. It’s ridiculous and petty. However, it’s probably not a good idea for H&M to provoke William, who may be King sooner than anyone thought. Once King he has the power to rescind the HRH and titles of the children. All he has to do is issue new LP.
I mean who cares? Harry may care in the sense that that’s his birthright and it’s unfair, but it’s hardly like their success hinges on those titles. I would raise you most people that support them do that in spite of those titles not because of those titles. That’s what the British media and the courtiers are not getting through their heads. If you took their titles away tomorrow and he became Harry Mountbatten Windsor and she became Meghan Markle mountbatten Windsor I would still support them wholeheartedly. I’m sure I’m not alone.
@Esquire: “… it’s probably not a good idea for H&M to provoke William, who may be King sooner than anyone thought.”
🙄 Why don’t we just wait awhile to actually see how things transpire in the future with Willileaks/ Peggers/ Cain inheriting the throne. Fate and karma may have other plans. 🫷🏻🌬 While Willy is, in fact, still legally next-in-line to the British throne, just hold onto your horses 🐎 for a bit, now. 😜☕️🍆🍔
Plus, I wouldn’t bet that either Prince Harry or Duchess Meghan are ‘quaking in their boots,’ or even giving a second thought to what Willy might do or ineffectually threaten to do when/ if he actually becomes king. 😂 🙀 🙈 🤦♀️ 🥱
I’d also argue that Harry and Meghan are very aware of exactly who William is and that he can write a new LP that rescinds their children’s’ titles. I’d imagine they’re prepared for that possibility as in if it happens it will happen. William will be weighing that choice whether they provoke him or not. It will ultimately come down to whether stripping the sussex children of their titles is something he wants to be known for. I’m sure he’ll want to and I’m sure Harry and Meghan know him well enough to know that too. It will depend on how worried he is about public backlash and whether the world will view him as a very racist king. Plus, there’s Andrew…
It’s all so tediously predictable: anything Harry and Meghan do is hurriedly discussed in the rota WhatsApp group chat (talking amongst themselves counts towards quoting “royal sources”), some input might come from flunkies at KP or BP and then the rushed, pearl clutching pieces and the associated faux outrage from the morning shows to the rota panel discussions on YouTube. If they want to milk it, we’ll get something more serious from Roya in The Times over the weekend. Rinse and repeat.
There’s something very hinky going on with the other brother and his wife right now. Rather than point that out or try to figure out what in the eff is going on with them, the garbage media is going def con 1 over the name of a web site. Apocalyptic headlines are produced on demand. Rinse, repeat. Aren’t the British people sick of it?
@brassy rebel; according to the tabloid comments, some of the British people are not only NOT sick of all the H and M bashing but are gleeful for a chance to vent their hatred. Hopefully the haters are not representative of the whole.
Where’s Kate?
I’m not a u.k commonwealth citizen. However, I would want them to have a website. They still got titles. Harry and Archie are pretty far up in the line of succession.
Matter of fact Harry will have to introduce Archie to house of lords in a few years. Think about it. You can’t have some hidden Prince just pop up. That’s how wars started. Archie will eventually have to go to someone’s Christmas pageants or some other.
“Matter of fact Harry will have to introduce Archie to house of lords in a few years”
Uh no he doesn’t. Aristos don’t automatically get a place in the House of Lords just because they’ve got a title since 1999.
Archie or Harry don’t need to do or go anywhere.
I don’t think royals can be in the house of lords since. Currently, Harry’s family is part of the royal family.
Ditto for all those people who have written in articles that based on his parents “bad behavior,” Prince Archie will be in big trouble because he will eventually have to go to his uncle, possible King William, someday to get permission to marry!!
No, he lives in the United States and has dual citizenship, plus regardless of his being in line to the British throne, he is not supported by the family, so he is not controlled by it. He can get married to anyone he likes, without following any silly rules or getting permission from any royal person.
Let the tabloids keep whining, they’ll only Streisand-effect the Sussexes even more.
All the whining in the tabloids just demonstrates that their existing narrative – that Hollywood has shunned the Sussexes and they’re failures – is a total and complete lie. And if any irate derangers or Fail commenters go to the site, they might just read those bios and absorb a thing or two.
ETA: And the petty in me needs us all to remember that they never wanted to go with Sussex Royal in the first place! It’s a stupid format that they were forced into because KP was using the branding Kensington Royal at the time so Harry and Meghan had to follow suit.
Didn’t Chucky break his promise to the dead queen by titling his wife as queen instead of queen consort?
How about the queens promise of a forever home for them by gifting them Frogmore? It was snatched back at her death. So much for promises.
That’s been overblown. Camilla’s rank and title is CONSORT, as will be Kate’s. She is styled QUEEN. She can never be regnant. It would have been so by the media regardless of what QEII wanted because it’s longer to type QC. Yes, Charles made it clear on the Coronation invite, but it’s all window dressing. It’s like Kate is always called Princess Kate, when she isn’t by birth a princess.
didn’t QEII wish for Charles’s second wife to be called Queen Consort or something like that, rather than straight-up Queen? they don’t give a hoot about that i guess
Yeah I HIGHLY doubt they were smart enough to get anything in writing regarding Harry using his HRH or the word Royal. I always got the impression that he did so out of respect for his grandmother and to a lesser extent his father. But if he decided to change his mind he could at anytime. The difference between them and Harry is that he has integrity and wouldn’t go back on his word. But also – keep pushing him and he will push back. Just look at how he handled Archie and Lilibet’s titles when they refused to update the website showing their titles once Charles became King.
Harry won’t have the last word re titles for his kids. Once King, William can easily revoke the HRH and royal titles. He is petty so he will.
The king of England doesn’t have that kind of power. To change the letters patent relating to the peerage system would require an act of Parliament. There is no historical precedent for this and the House of Lords would not give Will that type of power over titles.
@equality: are you American? You seem to be confused. There is no ‘King of England’. There is only a King of the UK, and including Commonwealth Realms. The King, using Royal Prerogative, can certainly remove the titles of HRH and Prince or Princess. He doesn’t need parliamentary approval. All that has to happen is to issue new LP. Once King, William can remove Harry’s HRH and Princely title, but I’m sure he wouldn’t do that.
That is not in doubt. I’ve just read an article from the bar in England submitting that the Dukedom can be removed under royal prerogative also because Harry’s peerage isn’t for life created by statute.
At law, we consider matters which cannot be challenged in court as ‘non-justiciable’. But as I’ve made clear, none of this is going to happen. Although, I do think that the titles of Harry’s children will go when William becomes King.
So, there are two issues: first, there are gifts conferred by the monarch as royal prerogative, which do not need parliamentary approval and are non-justiciable. Then there are peerages, governed by statute that may only be removed by parliament (usually). But the latter is debatable insofar as Harry’s dukedom and changes have been made to the relevant Acts to make it easier to put titles into suspension.
William can do that but if he doesn’t also do it to Andrew, and by extension Beatrice and Eugenie (their HRHs) then he will be causing a firestorm that will end the monarchy.
William probably won’t mind the credible accusations of racism and double standards if/when he removes Princess Lilibet’s and Prince Archie’s titles, as long as he can strike out at the niece and nephew who mean nothing to him. Staining the monarchy with obvious bigotry won’t bother Peg, as long as he can do something petty to The Better Brother. Going down in history as a raging royal racist means nothing to William as long as he feels he has one-upped Harry.
The New site still contains the transition statement and terms laid out in the Sandringham agreement including maintaining support for their royal patronages, the use of HRH and security. The Sussexes have kept the agreement but the Firm has failed to provide adequate security or allowed them to support any royal patronage in the UK or abroad which even includes work that supports the z Basically stepping back as a working royals means that they don’t officially represent the position of the Crown. The new website continues to maintain the terms of their end of the Sandringham Agreement. I do wonder if meeting with Charles may have opened the door to the royals piggy backing on the work of the Sussex in a kind of quasi half in half out scheme. Sandringham doesn’t stop them from supporting a royal patronage such as UK Rugby, the Royal Marines or Meghan’s royal patronage with Smart Works or the Commonwealth University Association. I wouldn’t be surprised if the Royal sites begin to include updates on any work the Sussexes do with these royal patronages
Did you guys see that insane article they barfed out yesterday stating that Wallis Simpson would have revolutionized the monarchy if she had been given a chance ? Of course they had to put a photo of the Sussexes as the header. And the comments were mostly fine with the fact that we’re talking about a literal nazi there. That was unhinged.
I highly doubt there is any written agreement because then there would be items that the Palaces would also have to stick to and they do everything they can to avoid writing down rules/obligations. Much less wiggle room if things are actually written down
I meant to say is that the royals have prevented the Sussexes from supporting many of their royal patronages including those involving the Commonwealth like Meghan’s Commonwealth University Association royal patronage or Harry attending UK Rugby games abroad. The Sussexes were supposed to step back not dissappear into a Gulag like Will intends. It is clear that QE2 still wanted to call on the Sussexes as needed. I think with the Wales MIA, activating the Sussexes may be the plan.
They couldn’t keep the royal patronages when they are no longer working royals. The Commonwealth Realms are sovereign and it would have been improper for Meghan to retain that patronage. It’s not law, but it’s convention because it was made clear that they no longer represent the monarch.
Sorry people before I get into this latest DM bilge, I lost it with the telegraph today. Sent them this!
Dear sirs
I have come to the conclusion that a columnist in your paper either has some serious substance (liquid or other) problem, or indeed a complete personality disorder.
Those are the only reasons I can think of for the vile, disgusting rant that Petronella Wyatt wrote, and you actually printed.
How dare she, the ex mistress of Boris Johnson, or was it just a quick fumble, only this time not in a field?!
Yes this self opinionated paragon of non virtue dared to print that Prince harry had “launched an unprovoked volley” at the Queen. Now, I and many others want an answer, who told you this, because mss Wyatt, as the king and Queen were the only people in that room, are you telling us that SHE is the Palace leak? Your now in the position of having to account for your rabid ramblings. And the next time you want to call someone a coward, go say it to a mirror, not the Prince, who did two tours in a war zone.
I think you will find, the only one with a sense of inferiority is you, that’s why you launched a pathetic, deranged attack on someone in another country.
Mary Pester
Saltash Cornwall
Lol @mary pester, well-done. Sadly, I get the feeling they won’t print it. But at least we can enjoy. Thx for sharing😘
Don’t hold back, @MaryP, tell us how you really feel ….. way to go, girl!
Mary Pester, excellent! Even if they don’t print it, I hope that she reads it.
Charles has got 99 problems and a website ain’t one. There’s no way these ‘journalists’ don’t know that.
💯spot on. Charles has got 99 problems and a website ain’t one. Perfect.
“Don’t use Royal”.
OK.
Now it’s: “Don’t use Sussex either”?
Where’s Kate?
Yes, I’ve jumped on the bandwagon. At this point, even a blurry picture would be fine.
I do not wish her or anyone else any harm, but I truly do not care where she is…I just want the British journalist to care…or write about it, as that should be their priority…Where is Kate and what is wrong with her? Should be a top headline…but no…they are sticking to the contract…protect the Crown and K$ll the Spare and his wife.
That royal protection could be the death of someone. They can keep it. Kate made a faustian bargain all right when she married William. I don’t think there are many people who would trade places with her today.
Yeah, I agree. What I really want to know is some minimal indication that Kate is okay — whatever okay means. Her complete absence from public life should be a story, and, as many have said, it wouldn’t take much to tamp down the bizarreness of the current protection or lack of interest or whatever the focus on the Sussex-related minutiae is trying to distract people from.
I’m starting to think the sussexes are in cahoots withBuckingham Palace to cover up what’s happening with the Heir and his wife…
@LAURAC, 😂😂😂😂, yeah and I played in the superbowl
How so?
Harry and Megan have kept their word, they are not useing H. R. H, so the DM can go fk itself, likewise Mss vine,
Vine, Wyatt Malone what is it with the shrivelled middle aged white women that continually go after Harry and Megan, ah silly me, just answered my own question.,
Shriveled, miserable, middle aged, versus young, vibrant, happy. Yep problem solved. But honestly, Harry and Megan are just using their name and Megan’s coat of arms, it’s got nothing to do with anyone else and the Palace haven’t said a word! So this outrage is as false as vines teeth! See the papers are behind the curve, in fact they are beginning to look more and more like miss Faversham left at the alter. The mirror got a nasty shock today, it tried to be clever and run a poll saying”should Harry and Megan be allowed to use their royal titles on their website 93 %said YES so suck on it vine and the daily mirror
They are royal sycophants protecting their turf. How else would they make a living? They insult the profession of journalism since they present as just paid PR of the palace doing its bidding.
Quote from this article:-
“The growing row centres around the Duke and Duchess’s decision to replace their Archewell website – the umbrella name for all their philanthropic and business endeavours – with ‘Sussex.com’.”
The Archewell website has not been replaced!
The Palace told Harry and Meghan that they couldn’t use Royal. They’re abiding by that request so there’s nothing for the Palace to be upset about.
The Sussex title is hereditary thanks to the Letters Patent by QEII. When Harry passes Archie becomes the next duke.
As usual the Brit press are trying to stir up a big nothingburger to distract from the salty left behind royal’s many failings and the Sussexes many successes. As well there rage at Harry’s MANY successful lawsuits. I also find it amusing they dare to mention the Sandringham agreement when Charles so obviously broke it by withdrawing security and cutting them off financially less than 3 months after the agreement was reached. As usual the Sussexes are to nice. They continue to honor an agreement that none of the parties entered in to in good faith or upheld.
The press making a big deal out of the Sussexes using their OWN name and COA and the firm not stopping them will only hurt the left behinds royals. If anyone pays attention to this nonsense they’ll just say who cares. Charles is the honorless bastard who broke his word first and that will be the talking point. All the ways Charles lied to or screwed over the Sussexes.
A toast to Brit media as they carry on tarnishing and destroying the monarchy.
The monarchy is going to be radioactive by the time these idiots are done with it. It will look as palatable as the Ku Klux Klan
I think this is all a big fat lie by the DM. Harry and Meghan are listed as Duke and Duchess of Sussex on the royal website. Harry has been doing business in the US as Henry Charles Albert David, Duke of Sussex – and didn’t the DM scrounge up some US documents that showed this?
What Harry and Meghan are doing is the least of the concerns at BP and KP.
Eurydice, I think he has to use Prince because that’s on his birth certificate, and then the DoS title.
The real breach of promise to Queen Elizabeth is calling Camilla queen.
It’s so funny that the Rota Rats scream about the word Sussex. A quick google search shows that there are approximately 6 towns/villages in North America, alone, with the name Sussex. Never mind the fact that this is their last name. Losers.
Think I’ll get me a Coat of Arms. Look lovely on the tea towels.
Ok. Can they have their house back now?
Man and woman used their legal married name . Shame on them . These people are just so bitter and salty
I wish they’d named their website wheresKate.com, just to make heads explode.
Oh, I love this!
QEII is dead and unable to honor any agreement she made with anyone. Charles broke faith, not Harry. Harry has minimal filial obligations to his father* and zero professional obligations. He owes the institution nothing.
*Like the cancer trip.
Listen, I want** Harry and Meghan to change their last name as much as any deranger does but they aren’t going to do that so who cares.
But c’mon, how great would Harry and Meghan Ragland-Spencer be?!? 😁
**I don’t actually want them to change their name. I’m totally kidding about this ridiculous complaint from ridiculous people.
All of this faux outrage reminds me of the line from Hamilton, “Do whatever you want, I’m super dead”. They clearly had that attitude when they took Frogmore away and dropped the consort before Queen Camilla.
I just visited sussex.com and downloaded Archewell’s impact report. So spectacularly well done…clear goals for and explanations of the work they’re doing, tangible statistics related to their work efforts, causes that are truly admirable and RELEVANT to our society (and that speak to their own struggles with SHITTY JOURNALISM)…I just love that the work is being done WITHOUT trumpets blaring and WITHOUT gold stars being handed out for the BARE MINIMUM (KM’s stupid five questions survey and Baldimort’s Earthsh*t).
As a public servant myself (teacher and fundraiser)….I want to yell that a life of service is not restricted ONLY to those in the immediate British royal family, and the salty island HATERS need to be reminded of that also. They’re a bunch of inbred, entitled grifters who “do service” because they need to appear useful to the UK general public and the Commonwealth.
DIANA WOULD BE PROUD, H&M!!!!!!
Their lame-assed “service” is only to justify their existence, yes.
And how fantastic that they’re actually proving their impact instead of just beating a drum and having their ROTA rats announce how wonderful they are. PROOF of their impact, no matter what any ignorant azz kissing newspaper says. BAM.
If memory serves me. “Sussex.com” wasn’t available when they were building their website, hence “Sussexroyal.com” I guess the guy who owned it finally lost control of it and they were able to buy the domain and build out a proper website. Hurrah for H&M!
It’s a nice website and as a non-Royal person understander. I don’t see any way they are trying to monetize off their titles.
They are doing exactly as agreed, they aren’t styled as HRH or selling their titles for money. That’s what Fergie and Andrew do.
I need to stand back… I have been going down rabbit holes on various posts on various sites about the Sussex’s… people say why why why report on them… I say why why why comment and give them clickbait… they say… we have a right to our opinion. It is just totally bonkers. The real question as others have said is WHERE is Willi…. What is wrong with Kate? Her family are all off skiing or in the Caribbean so they are not needed to drop everything to support Kate, so why can William not do some work? I find defending the Sussex’s exhausting, I cannot even begin to imagine how frustrated they are.
So is calling Old Leatherguts “Queen.” Charles forgot about that one pretty quickly, didn’t he?
The part about opening old wounds is a joke. The senior royals and British press in their ongoing toxicity against the Sussexes have kept the wounds open for years! Harry and Meghan said their peace and have moved on.
Love that Celebitchy highlighted that Meghan couldn’t have signed anything because she was excluded from the Sandringham Summit lol. Talk about a monarchy own goal. The jokes are constantly writing themselves. History will not look favourably upon the nasty RF.
All these deranged headlines are exhausting me. It makes you wonder if the BM need some good therapists. They way they are getting hysterical over everything Harry and Meghan do it’s beyond a joke.
These people, I swear. Baldimort will bring down the monarchy, full stop. I am most likely wrong, but I have a feeling that an instagram account might pop up next and I fully hope it does.
They are completely Streisand – effecting this. Are they actually working for Harry now? Cause they did a great job getting me interested in their site.
Ignore the bigoted UK person. Harry’s title is inherited. He is not like Edward. When he passes it can go to Archie. Under English (UK if you prefer) law, the last name is changed once the title is conferred. Harry used to be of Wales when in military, because it was his father’s title, now it belongs to his brother which is why his children are no longer Cambridge but Prince and Princess of Wales. Harry can no longer use Wales which is why given Duke title once married. Archie and Lilibet were not a Prince and Princess until the Queen passed and their grandfather took the throne. Once they became Prince and Princess their last name became Sussex and not Mountbatten-Windsor. They can revert if they decide as adults not to have the title of Prince and Princess. As for removal, the only royals who had titles removed were 2 relatives that served in the German Army as Nazi party members. What legal basis would Charles use to request Parliament remove titles? He has none. moving to America is not a legal basis. The ship had sailed. They planned to change the letters patent after Archie was born and before the Queen died. That is why thy had the queen grant Prince and Princess to Will’s children before the queen died. That was not a requirement because Will was heir though they used that excuse. They want to deny the mixed race children of Harry the title of Prince and Princess to go into effect once the Queen died. Harry and Meghan blew that out of the water in the interview because as stated what reason would they have to remove the children’s birthright? They requested a reason for why change and were never given an answer. We all know the answer. You don’t need to be a UK citizen to know English or UK law which is the basis for most American laws, and we are allowed to study law in England and the EEC laws. Sussex is their legal last name under English Common Law. Also, some American families use their coat of arms even if no longer UK citizens. Meghan and Harry can use theirs and their titles. Harry is not a republican he is for the monarchy and wanted his children to have that birthright. Meghan respects her husbands wishes.